Casale v. Casale

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Casale v. Casale

167 A.D.2d 983, 562 N.Y.S.2d 4, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14328

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 16, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 167 A.D.2d 983 (Casale v. Casale) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Casale v. Casale, 167 A.D.2d 983, 562 N.Y.S.2d 4, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14328 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: The court did not err in temporarily enjoining plaintiff from transferring a vacant lot acquired by the parties during their marriage. Although plaintiff had paid defendant $100,000 for her interest in the property, and title to the property was in his name alone, the property may still be found to be marital property (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [1] [c]; [3]). The court did not err in preserving the major asset of plaintiff pending final determination of the proceeding.

The award of temporary maintenance to defendant of $150 per week was proper in light of the facts that defendant had not worked during the marriage, was in ill health, and lived a lavish life-style during the marriage. In any event, the remedy for a claimed inequity in temporary maintenance is a prompt trial (see, Scheinkman, 1987 Supp Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 14, 1990 Pocket Part, Domestic Relations Law C236B:40, at 67; see also, Sayer v Sayer, 130 AD2d 407). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Kings County, Schneier, J.—temporary support.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Pine and Davis, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: The court did not err in temporarily enjoining plaintiff from transferring a vacant lot acquired by the parties during their marriage. Although plaintiff had paid defendant $100,000 for her interest in the property, and title to the property was in his name alone, the property may still be found to be marital property (see, Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [1] [c]; [3]). The court did not err in preserving the major asset of plaintiff pending final determination of the proceeding.

The award of temporary maintenance to defendant of $150 per week was proper in light of the facts that defendant had not worked during the marriage, was in ill health, and lived a lavish life-style during the marriage. In any event, the remedy for a claimed inequity in temporary maintenance is a prompt trial (see, Scheinkman, 1987 Supp Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 14, 1990 Pocket Part, Domestic Relations Law C236B:40, at 67; see also, Sayer v Sayer, 130 AD2d 407). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Kings County, Schneier, J.—temporary support.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Pine and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

167 A.D.2d 983, 562 N.Y.S.2d 4, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14328, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/casale-v-casale-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack